lawboy87:Perhaps, and how to the vast majority of Farker's react to the average PETA stunt? In fact, how many Farkers have anything but the same sort of reaction to just reading the name PETA, than say reading the name James O'Keefe?

Well...

O'Keefe stunts, most people wouldn't mind punching once or twice or having him just fark off and die.

Peta stunts, usually involve hot hated chicks so most people wouldn't mind punching them a few times in the fart box and then having them fark off and go away.

There's a difference between the reactions to the two. It's subtle but there.

Satanic_Hamster:lawboy87: Perhaps, and how to the vast majority of Farker's react to the average PETA stunt? In fact, how many Farkers have anything but the same sort of reaction to just reading the name PETA, than say reading the name James O'Keefe?

Well...

O'Keefe stunts, most people wouldn't mind punching once or twice or having him just fark off and die.

Peta stunts, usually involve hot hated chicks so most people wouldn't mind punching them a few times in the fart box and then having them fark off and go away.

There's a difference between the reactions to the two. It's subtle but there.

When I reached out to James Letton about the O'Keefe piece today, he briefly responded with his opinion that "It's hard to learn that a former defendant has gone to your home while you're away, looked at your wife from a few inches away (surrounded by about 6 or 7 other young strange men)and told her that he's looking for the man who wrongly convicted him. "

Now what makes this small piece different?1. I am quoting the person involved, but im not exaggerating, OR misrepresenting what he opinioned.2. I am only quoting a portion of what was said. But again unlike O'Keefe I'm keeping it in context, and the person I am quoting probably wouldn't object to my selecting just this portion of the conversation, as what I cut was immaterial.

For those wondering, yes this is a quote from Mr. Letton. I personally am amazed that O'Keefe isn't in jail waiting to see a judge. I assure you if you or I did that to someone who had convicted us of this sort of thing, that we would be in jail for menacing. And that is what this is, its menacing under the guise of journalism in my opinion.

dickfreckle:Man, Jim Letten is NOT a man to be farked with. Sure, he's a Republican, but that's neither here nor there in terms of his ultimate badssery as a US attorney. This man took down a ton of corrupt slime - particularly those related to New Orleans - and he was admired by damn near everyone. Think about the US attorney where you live. Do you even know his or her name?

Yes, I do, an ass-kicker like Letten named Patrick Fitzgerald who sadly just retired and who took down two governors, a police officer who tortured prisoners for decades and nearly got away with it and countless other crooked politicians and Illinois workers.

dickfreckle:Man, Jim Letten is NOT a man to be farked with.--snip--Seriously, if I had my pick between an NFL linebacker growling and running at me at full speed, or Jim Letten walking up with an extended hand to politely ask me a few questions, I'd take the linebacker.

PS, If Mr. Letton and a linebacker show up at your house, I swear I had NOTHING to do with it.

Greywar:OK...here is how journalism is done. A tiny example i you will.

When I reached out to James Letton about the O'Keefe piece today, he briefly responded with his opinion that "It's hard to learn that a former defendant has gone to your home while you're away, looked at your wife from a few inches away (surrounded by about 6 or 7 other young strange men)and told her that he's looking for the man who wrongly convicted him. "

Now what makes this small piece different?1. I am quoting the person involved, but im not exaggerating, OR misrepresenting what he opinioned.2. I am only quoting a portion of what was said. But again unlike O'Keefe I'm keeping it in context, and the person I am quoting probably wouldn't object to my selecting just this portion of the conversation, as what I cut was immaterial.

For those wondering, yes this is a quote from Mr. Letton. I personally am amazed that O'Keefe isn't in jail waiting to see a judge. I assure you if you or I did that to someone who had convicted us of this sort of thing, that we would be in jail for menacing. And that is what this is, its menacing under the guise of journalism in my opinion.

O'Keefe: Am I being detained? Am I being detained, sir?Officer: Oh, you are being detained.

This quote just brings me such joy.

Except O'Keefe wasn't questioning the cops, he was questioning Letten on a public sidewalk. Letten could have just walked inside the building (like he was doing when you started quoting). I get that you hate O'Keefe, but using the out-of-context tactic to make a point makes you look like a douche.

James!:This is the guy who prosecuted him and O'Keefe decided to show up at his house and harass his wife? There ought to be laws against that sort of thing.

Were you as outraged when a howling mob of leftists showed up at Karl Rove's house during the Bush years? How about when union picketers appear at some CEO's place? Or is it only when right-wingers employ the same tactics as the left that the indignation machine starts tut-tutting?

jjorsett:James!: This is the guy who prosecuted him and O'Keefe decided to show up at his house and harass his wife? There ought to be laws against that sort of thing.

Were you as outraged when a howling mob of leftists showed up at Karl Rove's house during the Bush years? How about when union picketers appear at some CEO's place? Or is it only when right-wingers employ the same tactics as the left that the indignation machine starts tut-tutting?

Situational ethics.

Somewhat....I think in both those cases those people had security, in this case the person involved didnt, and its seems like a pretty clear intent to just scare them.

I mean come on, he knew where and when to find this guy-he just went to his house to scare his wife. Someone not even involved. The ONLY purpose here was to put the guys wife in some fear.

Hannah Giles ended up settling in the lawsuit that Vera brought for $50,000. She now works for something called the American Phoenix Foundation whose main mission seems to be giving money to Hannah Giles.

Arachnophobe:cameroncrazy1984: MJMaloney187: I only support O'Keefe for his originality and huge brass balls

You are without a doubt one of the dumbest human beings on the planet.

Or possibly O'Keefe himself.

My favorite part of dialog with left-wingers is when it devolves into spluttering accusations of, "Well ... well ... YOU'RE STUPID!" It's like being in 5th grade again. Or, perhaps in the case of some of the posters, still.

jjorsett:James!: This is the guy who prosecuted him and O'Keefe decided to show up at his house and harass his wife? There ought to be laws against that sort of thing.

Were you as outraged when a howling mob of leftists showed up at Karl Rove's house during the Bush years? How about when union picketers appear at some CEO's place? Or is it only when right-wingers employ the same tactics as the left that the indignation machine starts tut-tutting?

Situational ethics.

Dude, you just saved me a sh*t ton of typing.

O'Keefe, right or wrong, gathered up a posse and confronted the man that he figured did 'em wrong. Sure, it ain't no Million Man March, but that fu*ker has guts. Pulling that sh*t off on Freret Street was brilliant (in case you were wondering why he wasn't arrested).

Nabb1:jigger: Hmm. Not any fan of this guy or anything, but that video only served to make that federal prosecutor look bad. And no prosecuting attorney has any business calling any political activist a coward.

Oh, hush. Letten was an outstanding US Attorney and rooted out a lot of political corruption here during his tenure.

It does throw people, the notion that you can be a Republican and not a completely awful person. Hell, most of the guys I hang out with on Friday are GOP and only one of them is clearly a racist. And you can tell because that's what the other GOPs say about him.

MJMaloney187:O'Keefe, right or wrong, gathered up a posse and confronted the man that he figured did 'em wrong.

I thought he was just giving Letten a book? You know, with a camera crew in attendance while the guy was out teaching a class. And Letten recused himself from Jimmy the Panty Thief's case, so uh, good job journalismning, O'Keefe. Gold star for you and your other friends from the Shire.

Greywar:"It's hard to learn that a former defendant has gone to your home while you're away, looked at your wife from a few inches away (surrounded by about 6 or 7 other young strange men)and told her that he's looking for the man who wrongly convicted him. "

It would be difficult to overstate the extent to which O'Keefe is farking human garbage

BojanglesPaladin:MJMaloney187: Say what you will about O'Keefe, he's a political activist and an investigative journalist ... not a coward.

Please provide cites for claims of "Journalist". Degree in Journalism? Published in reputable newspapers or magazines? I think the term you are looking for is "muckracker".

This person is not in anyway a real muckracker from wikiThe term muckraker refers to reform-minded journalists who wrote largely for popular magazines, continued a tradition of investigative journalism reporting, and emerged in the United States after 1900 and continued to be influential until World War I, when through a combination of advertising boycotts, dirty tricks and patriotism, the movement, associated with the Progressive Era in the United States, came to an end.[1]Before World War I, the term "muckraker" was used to refer in a general sense to a writer who investigates and publishes truthful reports to perform an auditing or watchdog function. In contemporary use, the term describes either a journalist who writes in the adversarial or alternative tradition or a non-journalist whose purpose in publication is to advocate reform and change.[2] Investigative journalists view the muckrakers as early influences and a continuation of watchdog journalism.

While I am a conservative Republican, I can honestly say partisans such as this jack-ass James O'Keefe are not only the poster children for what is wrong with politics in America today; they are indeed a symbol of what is wrong with our society as a whole. As this is a thread specifically dealing with James O'Keefe, he is everything this former federal prosecutor described him as being.

What the fark happened to people talking to each other, as opposed talking at/or past each other? Have a disagreement with someone? Why not have a discussion with said person as opposed to automatically trying to "video shaming" said person? Granted, it's much easier to just role camera and try to "shame" someone, but thankfully at times, that tactic sometimes backfires.

James, sadly the ill-conceived stunt you pulled in Senator Landreau's office hasn't taught you a valuable lesson, so I for one look forward to when you finally learn the meaning of the saying "pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered."

jjorsett:James!: This is the guy who prosecuted him and O'Keefe decided to show up at his house and harass his wife? There ought to be laws against that sort of thing.

Were you as outraged when a howling mob of leftists showed up at Karl Rove's house during the Bush years? How about when union picketers appear at some CEO's place? Or is it only when right-wingers employ the same tactics as the left that the indignation machine starts tut-tutting?

O'Keefe: Am I being detained? Am I being detained, sir?Officer: Oh, you are being detained.

This quote just brings me such joy.

What were the grounds for detainment? What crime was being investigated? Was there reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed?

Ooh! Excellent question. There was a crime either in progress or about to be in progress. Once they informed O'Keefe that he was banned from the premises, he would be guilty of trespass if he stayed on those premises.

I see you champing at the bit to cite Schmid. Don't forget that you have to account for Board of Trustees of State University of New York v. Fox. Show your work.

GoldSpider:jayhawk88: Letten then throws the book back at O'Keefe, an act O'Keefe lables a "minor assault in front of police."

Were charges filed?

Letten should have shoved that book so hard down that farker O'Keefe's throat so hard O'keefe could use the book the way the rest of sentient humanity would....to wipe his ass.

Born to GoP dirty trickstersEducated through college on Conservative scholarships.Pulling dirty tricks his entire adult life, O'Keefe would just as soon destroy your life as actually employ honestyIf it meant furthering the conservative cause.

Defending O'Keefe is defending political assassination.You become just like him....a coward.

MJMaloney187:Except O'Keefe wasn't questioning the cops, he was questioning Letten on a public sidewalk.

No, actually, he was on private property.

And I get it that O'Keefe thinks that because it's a university that he can do what he pleases, but per Board of Trustees of State University of New York v. Fox, that does not mean that he can't be thrown off for trespassing if it meets the Central Hudson test.

X-boxershorts:GoldSpider: jayhawk88: Letten then throws the book back at O'Keefe, an act O'Keefe lables a "minor assault in front of police."

Were charges filed?

Letten should have shoved that book so hard down that farker O'Keefe's throat so hard O'keefe could use the book the way the rest of sentient humanity would....to wipe his ass.

Born to GoP dirty trickstersEducated through college on Conservative scholarships.Pulling dirty tricks his entire adult life, O'Keefe would just as soon destroy your life as actually employ honestyIf it meant furthering the conservative cause.

Defending O'Keefe is defending political assassination.You become just like him....a coward.

that sounds like a terrible idea. Why is the liberal answer always violence?

So I looked up Doug Giles because I don't think I have ever heard of him, and he writes for Townhall now I have heard of it but then the brief bio on Townhall they say thisDoug Giles is the Big Dawg at ClashDaily.com.

Which just raises more farking questions.What kind of douche calls someone a Big Dawg and not big dog or just say he is what ever title he actually has at this site?Second what the hell is ClashDaily.com? I don't remember it ever being linked on Fark and look at the sites that are linked on here all the time, this must be really be the bottom of the barrell.

jigger:Hmm. Not any fan of this guy or anything, but that video only served to make that federal prosecutor look bad. And no prosecuting attorney has any business calling any political activist a coward.

But he's not a "political activist". He's a sleazy, manipulative political opportunist. The only thing legit about his productions is that he shot them on a camera, and his name is actually James O'Keefe. Otherwise, everything related to this asshole is a lie. He doesn't deserve in any way to be called a "political activist".

I wouldn't care if O'Keefe did everything 100% legally and was totally in the right and whatever and all that.

He's a disgusting smarmy douche and deserves scorn and censure for no other reason than that he's got an eminently punchable face and thinks he's just a wonderful person, when in reality he's an insufferable asshole.

Gyrfalcon:I wouldn't care if O'Keefe did everything 100% legally and was totally in the right and whatever and all that.

He's a disgusting smarmy douche and deserves scorn and censure for no other reason than that he's got an eminently punchable face and thinks he's just a wonderful person, when in reality he's an insufferable asshole.

Hmmmm.

Maybe start a white house petition to legalize punching him in the face.

jjorsett:James!: This is the guy who prosecuted him and O'Keefe decided to show up at his house and harass his wife? There ought to be laws against that sort of thing.

Were you as outraged when a howling mob of leftists showed up at Karl Rove's house during the Bush years? How about when union picketers appear at some CEO's place? Or is it only when right-wingers employ the same tactics as the left that the indignation machine starts tut-tutting?

Situational ethics.

I was unaware that this guy is an associate of war criminals or is emblematic of our economic issues. (I.e., the other guys are f*cking evil bags of sh*t, short of being murdered or raped, I could care less what happens to them).

I was aware, however, of your penchant for potato logic. I give you 3/5 Russets.

Satanic_Hamster:Gyrfalcon: I wouldn't care if O'Keefe did everything 100% legally and was totally in the right and whatever and all that.

He's a disgusting smarmy douche and deserves scorn and censure for no other reason than that he's got an eminently punchable face and thinks he's just a wonderful person, when in reality he's an insufferable asshole.

Hmmmm.

Maybe start a white house petition to legalize punching him in the face.

Likely get taken down like the one I did to punch Grover Norquist in the dick.

skullkrusher:Mikey1969: johnryan51: Why isn't he in jail for bugging a senators office?

Because he sucks the right cocks.

probably had something to do with the lack of stuff to bug offices with too

So please enlighten us as to what he was doing there... Delivering Girl Scout cookies, maybe? His stated purpose was to "prove" that the Senator was ignoring constituent calls, if he wasn't bugging the place, how else was he going to prove this? His stellar word of honor?

spongeboob:So I looked up Doug Giles because I don't think I have ever heard of him, and he writes for Townhall now I have heard of it but then the brief bio on Townhall they say thisDoug Giles is the Big Dawg at ClashDaily.com.

Which just raises more farking questions.What kind of douche calls someone a Big Dawg and not big dog or just say he is what ever title he actually has at this site?Second what the hell is ClashDaily.com? I don't remember it ever being linked on Fark and look at the sites that are linked on here all the time, this must be really be the bottom of the barrell.

Doug Giles is a right-wing evangelical preacher who defends the manliness of conservatives compared to the wussitude of liberals. Basically, he's every American Thinker article if it were written by a middle-aged father who imagines himself a pro-wrestler from the 80s.

Mikey1969:skullkrusher: Mikey1969: johnryan51: Why isn't he in jail for bugging a senators office?

Because he sucks the right cocks.

probably had something to do with the lack of stuff to bug offices with too

So please enlighten us as to what he was doing there... Delivering Girl Scout cookies, maybe? His stated purpose was to "prove" that the Senator was ignoring constituent calls, if he wasn't bugging the place, how else was he going to prove this? His stellar word of honor?

If you want someone imprisoned for bugging a senator's office, at the very least I think they should be in possession of equipment to do so. The fact that you really, really, really hate the guy doesn't make him guilty of whatever you want him to be guilty of. Hell, he might've been there to plant a dirty bomb too!

probably had something to do with the lack of stuff to bug offices with too

So please enlighten us as to what he was doing there... Delivering Girl Scout cookies, maybe? His stated purpose was to "prove" that the Senator was ignoring constituent calls, if he wasn't bugging the place, how else was he going to prove this? His stellar word of honor?

If you want someone imprisoned for bugging a senator's office, at the very least I think they should be in possession of equipment to do so. The fact that you really, really, really hate the guy doesn't make him guilty of whatever you want him to be guilty of. Hell, he might've been there to plant a dirty bomb too!

It was his stated intention. Just because he's so retarded that he couldn't bring the right equipment, it doesn't change that fact that it's what he SAID he was going to do.